You apparently don't know how to read, I wasn't talking about SEGA:
Also a myth, that the deal busting created the PS1. Sony had to have already been working on the hardware. There's no way the hardware and first wave of third party deals and production were all done in less than a year. It's literally impossible.
If you weren't so busy trying to be a smartazz you would have read correctly instead of imagining things in your head.
As I said you made a pointless failed attack attempt while confirming what I originally said. Since the actual rejection was in 1992, they had to have hardware in some form already and didn't start the hardware after the Nintendo deal, which was wait for it, the MYTH.
Thanks for verifying I was right expecting hardware to have existed before then. I'm sure you'll try some semantic dance between "Sony" and "Ken", which is irrelevant since the previous hardware was used by Sony to finish designing and producing the PSX Soo yeah. Still accurate, sorry.
Since reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, allow me to break this down piece by piece. You said you weren't talking about SEGA, and then "proved" that by quoting yourself saying, "Sony had to have already been working on the hardware," and then you followed it up with, "they had to have hardware in some form already and didn't start the hardware after the Nintendo deal."
First of all, even if you weren't talking about SEGA I still threw them in with Nintendo because the June 1992 meeting occurred after both Nintendo and SEGA rejected Sony. So it doesn't matter whether you mentioned SEGA or not.
Secondly, of course Sony had some technology that they used for the PlayStation. So did Nintendo. So did SEGA. Nearly everyone has some technology that they don't need to build themselves because it already exists. But the nuts and bolts of the PlayStation was the CD-ROM tech. I already said that Ken Kutaragi had designed a proprietary CD-ROM-based system, and that he presented that system to the Sony President in June of 1992. Sony had not worked on this, but Ken Kutaragi did. Ken didn't show this to the Sony President until the June meeting in 1992 which was (again) after both the Nintendo and SEGA rejections.
Furthermore, I didn't verify that you were right. You said, "
Sony had to have already been working on the hardware." You even bolded the word 'Sony'. Ken Kutaragi is not Sony. Bill Gates is not Microsoft. Ken could have sold his tech (which was made without Sony authorization or oversight) to another company.
To take this a step further, let's say that you work for Microsoft. If you go home and invent a product, and then you give Microsoft permission to use that product as the base for a new Xbox, does that mean that Microsoft worked on the product prior to you giving it to them? Of course it doesn't. You're little "thinks-he's-always-right" Eddie, not Microsoft.
The PlayStation-X was not something Sony was aware of, or something that they were working towards, prior to June of 1992. In fact, even when presented with it there was a lot of opposition to the idea within Sony. This is fact. There are website articles that confirm this. There are Wikipedia articles that confirm this. You're being intentionally dense, and you need to learn to admit when you're wrong.
If you have verifiable proof that I am wrong, please present it. But you keep saying things like, "had to have," and, "there's no way," and, "literally impossible," but you don't have a shred of evidence to support your claim. I, fortunately, have done actual research and read the articles discussing this.
web.archive.org
In May that year, Sony finally put a stop to negotiations, and whether or not it should retain the project was decided at a pivotal meeting chaired by Ohga on June 24. The great majority of those present opposed it, but Kutaragi nevertheless revealed that he’d been developing a proprietary CD-ROM-based system capable of rendering 3D graphics, specifically for playing videogames – not multimedia. When Ohga asked what sort of chip it would require, Kutaragi replied that it would need one million gate arrays, a number that made Ohga laugh: Sony’s production of the time could only achieve 100,000. But Kutaragi slyly countered with: “Are you going to sit back and accept what Nintendo did to us?” The reminder enraged Ohga all over again. “There’s no hope of making further progress with a Nintendo-compatible 16bit machine,” he said. “Let’s chart our own course.”
And achieving that meant Ohga removing Kutaragi from Sony, fearing that the widespread internal opposition to the project might crush Kutaragi’s resolve. “There was a huge resistance inside the company to actually being in the videogames business at all,” explains Harrison. “The main reason why the Sony brand wasn’t really used in the early marketing of PlayStation was not necessarily out of choice, but it was because Sony’s old guard was scared that it was going to destroy this wonderful, venerable, 50-yearold brand. They saw Nintendo and Sega as toys, so why on Earth would they join the toy business? That changed a bit after we delivered 90 per cent of the company’s profit for a few years.”
You're just presenting your feelings as if they're fact. Well guess what? Facts don't care about your feelings. Sony was not working on the PlayStation prior to June of 1992. Ken Kutaragi may have worked for Sony, but what he created was his own device that he chose to use for the PlayStation, and Sony did not give him permission or authorization to create it. They didn't even know it existed until that June meeting. And even with the biggest piece of the PlayStation (the CD-ROM-based tech) a lot of people were still opposed to this. So no, Sony didn't work on the PlayStation prior to the deals with Nintendo and SEGA failing. Sony didn't work on the hardware for it. Ken Kutaragi did, and the only reason this even happened was because the Sony President was enraged at the way Nintendo and SEGA (but mostly Nintendo) had treated them.
